David Makovsky to MESH:

Dennis Ross and I wrote our book because we thought there is a need to base policy toward the Middle East on the complex realities that America confronts there. For too long, ideological blinders or theoretical views of the region have guided those who shaped and made U.S. policy. It is time that changed. And that is why we decided to write a book that explores the myths and the illusions that too often have driven American approaches to the region. We are not content only with exposing why certain key assumptions have been wrong and have produced mistaken policies. We want to outline and explain the key assumptions that ought to be driving what America does and how it does it in the region.

---

Product Description

Two experts debunk misconceptions about the Middle East and set clear-eyed policies for the future

Why has the United States consistently failed to achieve its strategic goals in the Middle East? According to Dennis Ross and David Makovsky, two of America's leading experts on the region, it is because we have been laboring under false assumptions, or mythologies, about the nature and motivation of Middle East countries and their leaders. In Myths, Illusions, and Peace, the authors debunk these damaging fallacies, held by both the right and the left, and present a concise and far-reaching set of principles that will help America set an effective course of action in the region.

Among the myths that the authors show to be false and even dangerous is the idea that Israeli-Palestinian peace is the key to solving all the Middle East's problems; that regime change is a prerequisite for peace and democracy; and that Iran's leadership is immune from diplomatic and economic pressure.

These and other historic misunderstandings have generated years' worth of failed policies and crippled America's ability to make productive decisions in this volatile part of the world, a region that will hold the key to our security in the twenty-first century. Ross and Makovsky offer a critical rethinking of American perceptions at a time of great import and change.

---

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #52472 in Books
• Published on: 2009-06-11
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Hardcover
• 368 pages

Features

• ISBN13: 9780670020898
• Condition: NEW
• Notes: Brand New from Publisher. No Remainder Mark.
• Click here to view our Condition Guide and Shipping Prices

From Publishers Weekly
Ross (The Missing Peace) and Makovsky (Making Peace with the PLO) contend that if the U.S. wants to broker peace in the Middle East, it must cease operating from ideological assumptions and œsee the world as it is. Ross, now an adviser to Hillary Clinton, was chief negotiator for the Clinton administration, and Makovsky is with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy; their call comes with real bona fides. œContext matters, they write—but they, too, fail to consider the entire context in question: Israel is all but denied agency, as the authors fail to address the impact of its occupation of Palestinian lands. What may be the crux of the book is found in a mention of This Much Too Promised Land by Ross's former deputy, Aaron David Miller, which examines American negotiating mistakes, including the efforts of his and Ross's team. Ross and Makovsky's open antagonism to Miller suggest they may be less interested in learning from errors than in explaining why everyone else is wrong. (June)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

About the Author
Dennis Ross is special advisor to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for the Gulf and Southwest Asia. He is the author of the bestselling The Missing Peace.

Analyst and former journalist David Makovsky is a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and the author of Making Peace with the PLO.

---

Customer Reviews

Good Insights, but -
Why has the U.S. consistently failed to achieve peace in the Middle East? According to the authors, it is because we have repeatedly fallen for myths about the region. These include: 1)Iran's religious leadership is immune from diplomatic and economic pressures, 2)Israeli-Palestinian peace is key to solving all the Middle East problems, and 3)Regime change is prerequisite for peace and democracy.

The authors early on point out that Middle-East diplomacy must be addressed in the larger context of China, Russia (seeking a role as counterweight to the U.S.?, nervous about its own Muslim inhabitants), and Global Warming (the Middle East can undercut initiatives if they lower prices).

Clearly, the preeminent threat of our time is that radical Islamists may get their hands on a nuclear weapon. In addition, say the authors, it remains unlikely that Islamists extremists who embrace suicide bombing are deterrable. While perhaps true, downgrading the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from top priority in the context of terrorism seems extremely dangerous, given Bin Laden and others listing it as a prime grievance. On the other hand, the authors do make the case that this 60-year-old conflict is not the answer to every Mid-East problem - eg. the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988), and Gulf War I and II had no connection to the Israeli-Palestinian issue.

"The main opponents of Arab-Israeli peace . . . primarily the Islamists" is a statement that suggests a serious bias on the author's part - no documentation was given. Though the book repeatedly slams Bush II policies in the area, this statement creates wonder that the authors would have done better. Further, at no point do they depict Israelis as a source of problems - even their continual building of settlements.

Moving on to Iran, the authors begin stating that U.S. problems with Iran go back many years . . . starting with the 1979 revolution - oblivious to the U.S. role in overthrowing the elected Iranian government to protect U.S. and British oil interests. Regardless, the current situation is depicted from both the viewpoints of "engagers," and "regime changers." Again, solutions are muddled by Russia, China, and the 2007 NIE findings on Iran's nuclear program. Ross/Makovsky see sanctions as having impact - prices of affected goods have risen 50%, and possibly this underlies the dissidents' energy in the latest election. On the other hand, the book should have done a better job of examining the problems associated with Iran's declining production - the material was unclear what the root causes and cures are.

Finally, "Myths, Illusions, and Peace" probably makes its greatest contribution regarding the topic of Israel's value to the U.S. Other sources conclude that Israel has no positive value whatsoever; Ross/Makovsky point out that Israel has protected Jordan vs. Syria, and can be seen as a counterweight to Iran, Hamas, and Hizbollah. The latter points, however, were not explicated.

Stunning book, and destroyer of myths and illusions!
In the last decade, a very unfortunate book came out by Mearsheimer and Walt, the infamous "Israel Lobby" book, which was mostly panned by reputable critics, loved by either ignorant people, or flat out bigots. Many of the preconceived notions in the book continued to be perpetrated, despite the fact neither Mearsheimer and Walt ever were diplomats in the ME or had much to do with it.

Well the rebuttal to that book, and the neo-conservative's generally equally false views, has come! Dennis Ross and David Makovsky do a stunning job laying out the "realist" and "neo-con" arguments, and rebutting them.

The most important debunking, in this book, is of course on the "realists." The linkage myth is one that has plagued too many supposed academics, even tho it has proven to be false. Ross and Makovsky systemically smash that myth, citing events in which US leaders tried to vacate Arab and Islamists by not being as friendly to Israel. And as the Eisenhower example in 1956 shows, this approach is a miserable failure. I believe this is important because to think that Israel hurts us in the ME, while somewhat intuitive, is in fact misguided and incorrect. Other myths include how realists think that the US can dictate peace, or that Israel is the problem, which Ross and Makovsky show, conflicts with reality, by exposing us to the nuance Mearshemier, Walt, and their supporters know not. They also tear apart the idea that we can negotiate with Hamas, Hezbollah, or Iran without preconditions by virture that these guys have proven themselves as not pragmatists, but sheer ideologues, despite what Brzezinski and Carter and Walt would say. Zinging the idea of living with a nuclear Iran also really was informative, because when one looks at it, it clearly is not as rational as the USSR/China, nor does the politic body have the control over the military needed. The book destroys the "realist" ideas that Israel is a burden, when the fact it is not only a massive ally to the US, but inadvertently to other Arab regimes, almost ironically.


It also debunks neo-con ideas, like thinking regime change is the only answer, and on the more important issues on how to push democracy. While the neo-cons have great principle, they failed to apply it well, or take note about social development, wealth creation, or state infrastructure, which are necessary to actually build a democracy. This explains in Iraq why it failed, tho in no small part thanks to Ahmad's meddling there.

There are two points where I disagree with the authors. I think they are a little optimistic on the peace process. I truly think the only reason Arafat didn't accept 2000 was because he wouldn't accept a Jewish state. But I do think for PR purposes, we must try, tho on better terms to Israel, who are the moral and winning party. I also wish they addressed the problems within Islam as practiced today. But they did mention the importance of challenging aggressive Islamist jihadism.

A spectacular read in history and strategic politics in the most complicated region in the world, politically. In particular, I enjoyed seeing smashed to pieces the most was the IRA comparison to Hamas and Hezbollah. I think this book does a great job at hitting the neo-cons, and I was shocked Bush didn't react to the 2003 letter, especially before Ahmad came in. But I am equally amazed at how easily the more dangerous Mearsheimer Walt ideology was torn to pieces. I say it is more dangerous because of the political pendulum effect, and ironically, the same administration for which Ross works, is practicing "realism." But I believe Ross is the guy keeping it from going off the edge. The Obama administration right now, seems to be trying to be "contra-Bush," but to too much of a degree, and this seems to be pressuring only Israel, not the Arabs. But I have faith that Dennis Ross is in the administration, especially after his spectacular book, that they will buck up! He shows both the faults of both schools, yet manages to divorce the Israel-Palestinian/Arab peace process from either school, and show it for what it is: not completely irrelevant to peace in the ME, but more importantly, not nearly at all the cause and answer to all the problems in the Middle East.

A must read to understand the politics of the Middle East, and the US/Israel role. It shows that dogma is not the way to view the ME like neo-cons, but interests and power surely do not guide everything, as the "realists" say. It is all of those things PLUS values and ideology. It lays out a new direction, that takes neither the rigid neo-conservative ways, nor follows the closed minded simplistic "realist" ways. Nothing is simple, except that this book is a must read.

Likely the years best and nost thoughtful book on this topic
Every year, we get treated to a torrent of banal, predictable books about the Middle East. Occasionally one floats above the flotsam to offer not only real insight, but genuine thoughtful recommendations on new paths the United States might pursue in its diplomacy with that chaotic region. "Myths, Illusions, & Peace: Finding a New Direction for America in the Middle East" is fortunately in that rare second category.

Ambassador Dennis Ross, among America's most seasoned diplomats, and co-author David Markovsky successfully demolish many fictions on which our Mideast diplomacy is often based. Neocons imagine that negotiating with autocrats is by definition fruitless and that the seeds of democracy wait to bloom beneath every Arab street, needing only a little fertilizer. Their opponents, so-called "Realists," claim that ideology and religion are just veneers for power politics and that America's "rational" calculus is universal and axiomatic. Both cling to the specious notion that, despite all evidence to the contrary, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is at the heart of all the regions woes and conflicts -- despite the countless wars, coups, massacres, as well as retarded economic and political development among the Arab states which have nothing to do with Israel. Likewise, members of both of these schools over emphasize America's centrality in the region, imagining every action a reaction to some US policy in the narrow way every event in the Cold War was seen as byproduct of that conflict.

Yet beyond this books careful historical analysis, the authors build on the shards of past misguided policies to offer new and practical way to precede that could serve as a roadmap for the Obama administration. Iran, the Arab-Israeli conflict and Islamic extremists, continue to be among our nation's most vexing foreign policy challenges. Ross and Markovsky discuss unused diplomatic tools that could be brought to bear on Iran, ways to strengthen the hands of moderate forces in the regions, and strategies to strength civil society among the regions autocratic regimes to lay the foundation for growth and future freedom.

Though occasionally "Myths, Illusions, & Peace" reads like a long, imploring memo to the state department - and they would do well to study it -- serious students of America's role in this crucial region will not be dissuaded by its density. Indeed they will find it a rich and thought provoking text that they will want to consult again and again.